AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

TYPE GEN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

-x	RECORD REVIEW

mE49		0     NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION YES	No
x

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN
x

UOTHC	OTHER

DENY

ISSUES

A93. 19 A93.0l A93.09

INDEX NUMBER

A67. 10

x x
x x

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD

ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

11 Oct 2005	FD-2005-00185

Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant's request.

TO:

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous edition will be used

 	

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2005-00185	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable and to change the reason and authority for the discharge.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) but declined to exercise this right.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge. FINDINGS: Upgrade of discharge and change of reason and authority for discharge are denied.
The Board finds that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE: Applicant contends his discharge will cause problems in future employment. The records indicated the applicant received a general discharge for misconduct--minor disciplinary infractions. His misconduct included an Article 15 for dereliction of duty by underage drinking and frequenting a local motel while in technical training school, three Letters of Reprimand for failure to go two occasions, late for duty and not properly wearing his field jacket, and one Record of Individual Counseling for failure to go. The DRB opined that through  these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior. The DRB considered whether applicant should have been separated with an Entry Level separation during the first 180 days of his military service.  However,  since  his  discharge took effect on 29 Mar 05, by law, the DRB cannot change a discharge to an Entry Level Separation. The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members. The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

CONCLUSIONS: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process.

In view of the foregoing findings the Board further concludes that there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of discharge, thus the applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief